Division
David Leyonhjelm Prior to adjourning the debate on this we heard from Senator Cameron. Senator Cameron was responding to the amendments which I moved—which are quite little amendments—which basically said that the government should not intrude into the process of negotiating an extension to paid parental leave between an employer and an employee. In the course of that opposition to my amendment he engaged in a fairly broad-ranging attack on me and my values—or what he assumes my values to be. So I think it is probably fairly appropriate that I respond, at least partially, in kind. His first point was that politicians on $200,000 a year were not qualified or entitled to talk about people on penalty rates. I guess the point there is that I was not always a politician. In fact, Senator Cameron has been a politician for a great deal longer than I, and earning $200,000 a year at the expense of taxpayers for many years, during which time I was earning in the private sector, working for a living. He also implies that one can only be compassionate about low-income people if you are poor or if you are in favour of spending other people's money. Clearly, that is not an appropriate argument. When we are getting into subjects like appropriateness, he used words which I thought were interesting. He used the word 'unacceptable', then he used the word 'obnoxious' and then he used the word 'fairness'. I do not take any of those personally, but I have to say—and, Senator Cameron, I am delighted that you have joined us; it really would be a waste of my breath to return fire without having somebody to aim at—I am an excellent judge of what is acceptable and unacceptable, I am an excellent judge of what is obnoxious and I am and excellent judge of fairness. In fact, I think I am probably the best judge of those things that I know. In fact, I have never met anybody else who I think is a better judge than me of what is unacceptable, obnoxious or fair. Perhaps you might disagree with me,
Senate, 2015-10-12. affirmative: ayes 33, noes 29.
Question
David Leyonhjelm Prior to adjourning the debate on this we heard from Senator Cameron. Senator Cameron was responding to the amendments which I moved—which are quite little amendments—which basically said that the government should not intrude into the process of negotiating an extension to paid parental leave between an employer and an employee. In the course of that opposition to my amendment he engaged in a fairly broad-ranging attack on me and my values—or what he assumes my values to be. So I think it is probably fairly appropriate that I respond, at least partially, in kind. His first point was that politicians on $200,000 a year were not qualified or entitled to talk about people on penalty rates. I guess the point there is that I was not always a politician. In fact, Senator Cameron has been a politician for a great deal longer than I, and earning $200,000 a year at the expense of taxpayers for many years, during which time I was earning in the private sector, working for a living. He also implies that one can only be compassionate about low-income people if you are poor or if you are in favour of spending other people's money. Clearly, that is not an appropriate argument. When we are getting into subjects like appropriateness, he used words which I thought were interesting. He used the word 'unacceptable', then he used the word 'obnoxious' and then he used the word 'fairness'. I do not take any of those personally, but I have to say—and, Senator Cameron, I am delighted that you have joined us; it really would be a waste of my breath to return fire without having somebody to aim at—I am an excellent judge of what is acceptable and unacceptable, I am an excellent judge of what is obnoxious and I am and excellent judge of fairness. In fact, I think I am probably the best judge of those things that I know. In fact, I have never met anybody else who I think is a better judge than me of what is unacceptable, obnoxious or fair. Perhaps you might disagree with me,
How each member voted
Per-member votes are not present in this static export. Consult the original division record.
Related bills
Only formal divisions leave a per-member record. A procedural vote is not necessarily a vote for or against a bill.